Let me explain this, Saxifrage deleted genmays page for not being notable enough. Someone recreated the page, and Saxifrage again deleted and put a block on all further creation of genmays article.
So we can not edit genmays wikipedia article to bring it up to standards, it has to go through the deletion review before anything can happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DPhrag

@ whoever that was hahaha

edit: im still laughing at this.. so elegant in it's simplicity

He gave me a gift for my comment.
What a gdamn baby.

You've been blocked for extreme incivility[1]. This block will expire in 24 hours and you are welcome to contribute constructively when you return. In the meantime, you might consider reading Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. — Saxifrage ✎ 07:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

You've been blocked for extreme incivility[1]. This block will expire in 24 hours and you are welcome to contribute constructively when you return. In the meantime, you might consider reading Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. — Saxifrage ✎ 07:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me explain this, Saxifrage deleted genmays page for not being notable enough. Someone recreated the page, and Saxifrage again deleted and put a block on all further creation of genmays article.
So we can not edit genmays wikipedia article to bring it up to standards, it has to go through the deletion review before anything can happen.

and Jester is suggesting we edit the walken wiki page and add in that Genmay is responsible for the Walken2008.com , therefore making genmay notable on wikipedia itself

edit: oh, see that it was already spelled out above, but the reference should be on the genmay wiki page (which is locked) so kinda hard to do

__________________
"That fucker always wins the URL competitions. I think he sold his soul to Google." -fly
the MD5 incident - www.genmay.net/showthread.php?p=1325652#post1325652

- Now that I've taken a look through them, I'm going to advise you to turn those "etc" into sources too. All of these talk about the hoax primarily, with General Mayhem getting only a trivial mention as the source of the hoax. That doesn't meet WP:WEB. — Saxifrage ✎ 08:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

- Now that I've taken a look through them, I'm going to advise you to turn those "etc" into sources too. All of these talk about the hoax primarily, with General Mayhem getting only a trivial mention as the source of the hoax. That doesn't meet WP:WEB. — Saxifrage ✎ 08:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

what a little bitch

wtf does he want a 10 page article on the hoax with a couple pages on genmay